On another note I am sure many people have had the opportunity to review the architecture of this new blockchain-less approach to the consensus algorithm. Has anyone been able to find and articulate any potential security problems or shortfalls?
Yep, just a few of them:
1. Full node stores the whole DAG data which means it isn't that much more scalable in comparison to blockchain without blocksize limit (e.g. Monero). It has the same limitation related to hardware storage capacity and bandwidth.
2. Witnesses control the network. And they are only 12 of them. If they form a cartel they can start censor the network or do other malicious behavior. Getting rid of witnesses cartel is hard - the network needs to split which is called "schism". Read the whitepaper for more info.
3. Blackbyte are not fully anonymous. When you send them you reveal your IP to hub. TOR implementation is work on to mitigate the problem. Eventually (if implemented) blackbyte would be as anonymous as TOR is anonymous which is not 100%. Monero is much more anonymous.
4. Whitebyte are fully transparent just as bitcoin blockchain. You can check the senders holdings just by going to DAG explorer. There are no plans to make them less susceptible to analysis and therefore more fungible.
5. Data storing feature is very limited due to cost. It's basically just a little text storing feature. Take a look at my calculations to see why.
I thought the second was the most obvious one and, in fact, it is. And given the other features that's a bit problematic. I thought of using TOR for BB but as you pointed out that's just as anonymous as TOR can be. Monero wins on that side.
Would be nice to hear something from tonych..